Sunday, November 27, 2016

Musings: Clear Thinking

The misinformed commentary in today's
edition of The Garden Island underscores just how deeply confused and
utterly misled the public remains on the pesticide-GMO issue in
Hawaii.

That's not surprising. The anti-GMO
movement, which has morphed into an anti-pesticide movement, is based on intentionally sowing and fertilizing lies.
It's one of the best ways to whip up fear and win converts to a false
cause. But it leaves people cynical,
disenfranchised and ignorant when things don't go their way.

She unleashes one of her typically
clueless rants, making such bogus claims as:

These ag companies can spray their
poison near our schools, hospitals and our homes, anywhere they feel
like it. We cannot complain because the law says so.

Like so many others, Linda is clueless about the many rigorous regulations imposed on commercial pesticide
use, especially restricted use pesticides. And yes, people can and do complain, which is why the pesticide enforcement officers are kept so busy.

But who can fault Linda when people who
do know better — people like defeated Kauai Councilman Gary Hooser, Center for Food Safety's Ashley Lukens and
Earthjustice attorney Paul Achitoff — continue to make like Hawaii
is some wild west where pesticide use is totally unregulated and out of
control?

That is a flat out lie uttered for one purpose only: to make people afraid so these groups can hit them hard for donations.

Linda goes on:

Why do I feel like I am in the Jim
Jones Cult? Just drink your Kool-Aid and everything will be fine. Are
we really that gullible? This scares me to death.

Yes, sadly, you are that gullible. And so are too
many of your fellow residents. Only your leader is not Jim Jones, but
Hooser-Lukens. So yeah, drink their Kool-Aid. How else are
they gonna get people to keep sending them money for another dose
of fear?

Mark Jeffers starts by spouting nonsense about
how Kauai folks supposedly stopped the Superferry and halted nuclear
missile launches at PMRF. Uh, the unsuccessful PMRF protests were about launching missiles from a sacred dune, not nuclear warheads, and the ferry was halted because it violated state environmental
laws. Neither issue had anything to do with county initiatives, or "home rule."

Mark then claims:

When the agri-chemical companies were
accused of field testing restricted-use chemical pesticides, there
were protests and the county began to take action to preserve the
life of the island. County government set about building regulations
and laws to preserve the life of the island and its people.

First, the seed companies are not
testing any pesticides, restricted use or general, in Hawaii. This is
another lie spread by Hooser, the late Tim Bynum and anti-GMO
activists like Hawaii SEED, CFS and Babes Against Biotech. Pesticide
testing is done in enclosed facilities on the mainland.

Second, Bill 2491/Ordinance 960 did
absolutely nothing to eliminate or even reduce pesticide use in
Hawaii. Its claim to "stop poisoning paradise" was total bullshit. The bill called for buffer zones and pesticide disclosure,
both of which the companies voluntarily agreed to do. The protests —
which were especially misguided if they were indeed based on a false belief about pesticide tests — did not result in any “building
regulations and laws” being passed “to preserve the life of the
island and its people.”

Jeffers then falsely asserts that "the
county lost its sovereignty on this issue and now may not make law or
regulate the actions of the agri-chemical seed-growers. And so,
therefore, the county has now lost its ability to preserve the life
of this island in that arena."

The County hasn't "lost its sovereignty
on this issue," because it never had it. Indeed, the entire purpose of the bill, as well as the resulting lawsuit and appeal, was to clarify the state and federal pre-emption issue. Earthjustice, CFS and Hooser were warned against this strategy by those who said it risked giving the seed companies a definition of pre-emption that they never could have gotten from the Legislature.

But the groups took their chances, in hopes of setting a precedent in their own favor. They lost. Now they and their followers are making like they've been screwed by the seed companies and a corrupt system. No, they're just seeing the end result of their flawed legal strategy.

It's not surprising that people like Jeffers, Boethe, Dustin Barca and other "red shirts" feel let down and disenchanted by the recent court rulings. They went in as true believers, not knowing the activists were using them as pawns in a bigger game. The movement was never intended to make Hawaii safer and cleaner. It was all about trying to shut down the GMO seed industry and set a precedent for local control.

Furthermore, the counties can regulate
some actions of seed-growers — just not those related to pesticides
or GMOs.

What really got me, though, was Jeffers' closing
statement:

I put my hope in the clear thinking and
pono actions of the children as they grow to help to preserve the
life of our island home.

How are the keiki going to engage in
clear thinking and pono actions when their elders — including
educators like Jeffers — are setting such a poor example by
demonstrating their own lack of critical thinking, their own loose
grasp of the facts?

This is the sad, and lasting, legacy of the anti-GMO movement in Hawaii.

68 comments:

Anonymous
said...

How much do you get paid Joan to keep beating the pro chemical company drum? Several of the companies do possess Experimental Pesticide Use Permits authorized for Hawaii operations. And Kauai residents stopped the Super Ferry from coming to Kauai long before the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled against them.

Do people understand that "experimental" pesticide use means using an APPROVED pesticide off label? So its like what they did on the big island with the coffee berry beetle. They used a pesticide that wasnt approved for that scenario but they wanted to see if it would work. That was the experimental designation.

So often, on topics where opposing points of view spout their perspectives hurling arrows at one another, the battle continues to rage on and on and on.Might it be possible to "acknowledge" that there are conflicting points of view, and rather than having blame spouted on one side and denial claimed on the other, should the following approaches be considered:1. Take an actual look at the ways there is an array of the use of chemical derivatives available in our midst. We can go to the store and purchase items to address our battle against insects and weeds! Governmental entities use stuff to eradicate weeds along the roadside. Commercial entities do the same thing to keep their landscaping looking great. Etc., etc., etc.2. Should we have a "round table" approach in addressing this problem collaboratively" Rather than go through the accusatory-denial exercise in futility, should we be focusing on how we may be able to cope with the problem collaboratively?In other words, there is a degree of "responsibility" among all of us, so, indeed, this is our shared kuleana! Can we move forward with that attitude in mind?

Hawaii's newspapers are terrible about publishing letters and op-ed pieces that go far beyond reasonable opinion and instead make wildly false assertions of fact. In the "post factual era" of fake news and social media propaganda, newspapers really do owe their readers and communities much better.

Stupidity is the result of two reasons - low IQ or closed minds that refuse to logically accept and process information presented. We have an abundance of it here. And yet, those with this affliction, unabashedly demonstrate it by opening their mouths or writing stupid articles.

In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time; performs an action that is contradictory to their beliefs, ideas, or values; or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas or values.

11/28 @ 6:33 AM, that is just uninformed rhetoric. Do you know there is peer-reviewed, published scientific work that demonstrates that over 99% of the pesticides we consume are produced by the plants themselves? Do you know that organic agriculture uses plenty of pesticides to produce food? Do you know about the scientific testing that is done on pesticide active ingredients, as required by law, to demonstrate the lack of harm from the compounds before they are even registered for use by the Federal government? Do you know that safety cannot be proven for anything? Do you understand the definition of the psychological concept of projection?

11/27 @ 2:12 PM, those are great concepts. Might I suggest two things:

1) What you are proposing lies at the very core of Integrated Pest Management (IPM), which the seed companies have been practicing for years. Implementation of IPM requires credible scientific education and hands on experience.

2) A round table approach requires that everyone be fully informed, or at least be willing to take in information, as well as a commitment to engage honestly in the process. Given how the JFFG failed, how do you propose to rectify the flaws from that attempt?

I know there are conflicting studies on the pesticides. I certainly do not have time to digest the conflicting studies, but I have sure noticed that around the same time as glyphosate became mainstream in our food supply, Americans started getting fatter and fatter. Maybe its all the diet soda (that makes you fatter than sugar soda), or maybe its the BPA in the plastic bottles. Or maybe its just the booze for a population that needs mind numbing. Perhaps its time to try reverse engineering the obesity epidemic and figuring out from there if there is a chemical cause, and then taking appropriate action.

Regarding your first statement, can you please elaborate? Would you agree that the secrets and lies have come from the anti-GMO/anti-pesticide crowd? It seems to me we had a "really really big round table" during the discussion preceding the passage of 2491, with a lot of people "engaging", and look what a farce that all was. How do you propose we keep the discussion respectful and fact-based?

@10:04, this is @7:54 (not @7:44 as you claim). Thank you for acknowledging my supremacy. This results from my taking the time to educate myself and investigate topics thoroughly, without a preconceived bias, drawing conclusions based upon well-documented facts. Thus, I am informed, rather than being uninformed.

@6:33, 11/28: am the one that made that statement regarding stupidity. I linked two reasons for stupidity using the mutually exclusive word "or". It was a glaring mistake because there is a mutually exclusive term "and/or" which applies to you. Suggest that you brush up on Logic 101 or mathematics where those are used before commenting and displaying your stupidity.

@ 6:33, actually, our bodies can process, or remove chemicals, including pesticides. The residues they are finding are in the parts per billion. Plus, Roundup doesn't bio accumulate and is exceeded in your urine. Therefore, it is an impossibility to consume enough Cheerios to be "poisoned" by pesticides. The one exception is Organophosphates, which are in the process of being phased out.

@ 11:10 I feel your frustration with the Antis; however, it's nice to reserve childish name calling tactics to the Antis. The tactic reflects poorly on them, and hurts their cause. If pro-GMO forces sink to their level, then we are no longer be acting more mature than the Antis, and we no longer stand on higher ground (it works towards defeating our cause).... Bear in mind, I've cast a few dispersion, yet, the comments were fact based on specific things said, and I refrained from degrading the person personally. For example, "my dog wouldn't even eat Gary Hooser's organic sweet corn." We can (hopefully) point out faults in their cause without demeaning them personally.... Anyway, that is my two cents worth....

I don't know offhand the woman's name, she has since passed, but she championed long and hard against DDT. She was called crazy, stupid, insane. She was vilified as an evil whacko out to endanger the population by denying them the DDT that was claimed to be perfectly safe, harmless to people. I'm sure there are people who would love to see that nice little gem of a chemical back on the shelves. Thank God for her and people like her who will stand up and question the petro chemical industry lest we would be spoon fed a whole litany of their "harmless" products, poisons!

11/28 @ 1:03 PM, that is you projecting your lack of integrity onto others. If you believe that about GE crops or conventional pesticides, then you have to believe that about organic products and conventionally bred crops as well. You're a typical anti who just demonstrates how correctly Joan and others describe you. Thank God there are many intelligent, credible, decent people to counter the likes of you.

11/28 @ 1:07 PM what does that have to do with todays' registered products? Do you have any idea what you are talking about?

Okay 4:36 PM, pay attention. The issue of safety was brought around tobacco, so then I posed the question regarding safety of water. More people die from water exposure every year then from tobacco exposure. Water causes billions of dollars in property damage worldwide every year. Water contains components that can be isolated and made into Weapons of Mass Destruction, and also has naturally occurring radioisotopes that cause cancer. OK so far? As another poster stated, take Logic 101 prior to posting.

You really need to educate yourself; what you are doing is not effective at all.

Umm... DDT is very safe to humans. In fact, just until recently, it was still used in India. However, the product bio-accumulates. Predators that ate the bugs killed by DDT had egg shell that are too thin. Then eagles ate those dead birds and developed the same problems. That lead to the product being phased out.

As for tobacco, I don't ever remember the government ever saying those products were safe. The tobacco industry had "TV doctors" adverting the product, but the general population has alway been aware of the dangers of tobacco. Further, the general population know of the dangers of pesticides, and they realize there is little danger posed by residues in food. However, big organic is looking to capitalize on those who fall for false claims (by utilizing the same tactics the tobacco industry used years ago)...

@12:07 yes you're correct about tobacco not being safe. The difference is! A smoker continuously inhale smoke every waking moment since the time a person started smoking.

You comparing tobacco / pesticide not the same type of exposure. Smoking is excessive compulsive behavior. How do I know! My parents were addicts to tobacco, mom's still alive at 87, dad died at 73 of stomach cancer / nemonia / drowning from within. And both of them exceed the normal life expectancy (go figure).

Fear mongering before the facts. Contact FDA to expidite the testing, if not we'll be WAITING FOR IT for a looooong time.

Oh! And I've been doing pesticides since 1983. Reading n following the labels, but not smoking my pesticides every waking moment since 1983.

I'm having a hard time keeping up with the flow of these comments but responding to the comment @ 4:38 PM by Anonymous who said...And water is not a pesticide so why is that being brought up into the argument?

I thought water was brought up because a Restricted Use Pesticde (RUP), chlorine, is commonly used to disinfect water in Hawaii and elsewhere......so we're all drinking a pesticide. And it's not a bad thing.

It is the "chemicals" added to the Tobacco to make cigarettes what it is. Our drinking water is laced with chlorine gas to get rid of the bacteria in the water to make it "safe" for us to drink. It is the "chemicals" in the bug sprays that kills bugs, ants, roaches, wasps, you name it "chemicals" kill it. If George Washington could only see the lies being spread on this island by so called leaders of the Community....Ai soos!!!

Earth to Bradley come in, their Is no way to get malaria in Nebraska, could never happen with or without chemicals. They sprayed DDT in areas all over the U.S. that could never get malaria. Why? Your Chem buddies started the fear mongering that mosquitoes were gonna get everybody and made a huge profit poisoning the earth to eradicate the boogie man. What harms the animals will eventually make its way to the humans. Problem is men like you, who put profit above everything else and use "saving people" as your excuse don't get it.

We use "chemicals" in our everyday lives. The seed company's are not the only ones using "chemicals". From Haena to Mana, people use "chemicals". "chemicals" kill or make one better like in medicines. Everyone should take a good look at themselves in the mirror. Argh, hence the use of mascara, shaving lotion, hair mousse, toothpaste, facial crèmes,...the list is endless. All "chemical" related. When people get sick the first thing coming to their minds is the Seed Company. People even sued the Seed Company for dust. They did not sue when it was Sugar lands. Same fucking red dirt/dust. 8:35 you thinking too much....Ha!

The seed companies are the chemical companies. They make all the products you are talking about @ 11:05. And they make our food. And they control our government with their lobbying. That's the problem.

@11:16, while many of the seed companies are divisions of companies that also make chemicals, not all of them are, and they don't necessarily make any of the chemicals mentioned by @11:05. And they don't make our food, and they certainly don't control our government with their lobbying. The problem is how you choose to perceive reality, via discarding information and facts that don't fit with your view of the world.

ummmm..... Earth to 8:00 am. They used DDT to kill hoards of grass hoopers that completely wiped out crops. So, DDT kept people from starving in the <a href="http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe30s/pests_02.html>1930's</a>. That is why people live longer today: Big Pharma and Pesticides. That's also why we need to keep pesticides too.

There is a case to made for very rare use of DDT. Since it bioaccumulates through trophic levels, if there is one application to kill insects (let's say a major Zika Yellow fever outbreak, and you use DDT fogger truck once in a neighborhood, once in a year), there is no way there is enough DDT left from one application to migrate into/up the trophic levels to be accumulated by birds to affect their eggshells. This is one of those ultimate risk / benefit analyses.

1:12 PM did you even read, much less comprehend, all of the posts? Are you saying DDT should never be used, even when it could be demonstrated that it would prevent an outbreak of a vector-transmitted disease, no other control measure would be effective, and there would be no negative impact on species other than the targeted insect?

@1:39 - Lost is the art of detailed analysis and comprehension, I'm with you ;)

DDT will kill just about every insect it touches in 1 application. It will not kill warm blooded or cold blooded animals (other than invertebrates) at that single use dose. It will not bioaccumulate... the word 'accumulate' has meaning :) One dose will not accumulate enough to cause widespread effects on vertebrates.

DDT is illegal to use in the USA, so it's a moot point here.

The gov't (CDC / EPA / Military) could give themselves emergency authority to use DDT if something vital to the USA was at risk from some insect. It is possible... And there is good evidence to back up no long-term effects of single use DDT in small areas (especially for mosquito control in a serious health emergency).

What about using DDT if Primary Screw worm gains a foothold in Florida? Stop one of the worst cattle pests, which the US eradicated with DDT and sterile insect releases many years ago. I don't think a lot of people realize how hard it is to farm... especially outside the US mainland.